W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > October 2010

Re: Non- and Partial-FRBR Metadata

From: Tom Morris <tfmorris@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 10:24:37 -0400
Message-ID: <AANLkTinse7OOfOF4y_q0+6GzF_jbnSkifPVmm2Fmm-cz@mail.gmail.com>
To: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Cc: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>, public-lld@w3.org
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net> wrote:

> One of the issues we face is that FRBR appears to require an E to link a W
> and an M. In the case where you have a smattering of data but not a complete
> description (as described in FRBR), would this allow you to link an M to a W
> even if you have no E properties?

Links are as valid a value for a property as a name or a date (and
arguably more important).  If the FRBR model requires an Expression to
link from a Work to a Manifestation (without commenting on whether
that's good or not), I think you'd just create an 'empty' Expression
where the only property values to start with are the links to the
single Expression and single Manifestation.  If you find another
Manifestation later, it would be linked to the 'empty' Expression too.
 Hopefully over time you discover more information about the
Expression and it gets added or merged in to what was initially a
graph node which consisted of nothing more than two links.

> In that case, what would the E URI resolve to?

You'd want to mint a URI for it so you have a handle to refer to it by.

Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 14:25:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:38 UTC